You ask:
“Hard to know if the nuggets of truth and wisdom are worth the chunks of falseness and willful ignorance. What do you think?”
To be honest. . .I’m not sure how to answer the question, since it is the article’s rays of wisdom and truth that pain me the most.
I have always feared for Israel’s survival; but there is a new fear in my chest now that is more disturbing, a fear for Israel’s very goodness. . . her very soul.
I cannot turn my back on Israel and face my conscience, but I dread that a day is coming when I cannot face my conscience and support Israel either.

> “a disturbing mix of reasonable conclusions (blockade is generally destructive to all, including Israel)”
What I find disturbing is that you find the blockade disturbing as opposed to finding the reason for the blockade disturbing.

New York Times columnist, Nicholas D. Kristof. Today, Kristof writes out of what he assures us is his pure motive, that of wanting to save “Israel From Itself.” I love the way columnists with bad advice preface their thoughts by giving us their good intentions—as if any Israeli with brains would take him seriously. ( Sounds like Rabbi Brad)
After all, he writes, Israel used “lethal force on self-described peace activists.” Kristof does not pause to discuss the amassed evidence that the group on board the ship were really not peace activists, rather than a group of jihadists ready to spring a trap on boarding commandoes. Now, he writes, Israel is doing what the Palestinians used to do- lashing “out with force in ways that undermine [Israel’s] own interests.”
As Ambassador Michael Oren points out in the same day’s Times in an accompanying op-ed, “the mob that assaulted Israeli special forces on the deck of the Turkish ship Mavi Marmara on Monday was not motivated by peace. On the contrary, the religious extremists embedded among those on board were paid and equipped to attack Israelis — both by their own hands as well as by aiding Hamas — and to destroy any hope of peace.”
Oren is clear as well about the raid’s actual intention. It was “not to deliver humanitarian aid to the people of Gaza, but to create a provocation that would put international pressure on Israel to drop the Gaza embargo, and thus allow the flow of seaborne military supplies to Hamas. Just as Hamas gunmen hide behind civilians in Gaza, so, too, do their sponsors cower behind shipments of seemingly innocent aid.” And, he adds, “The real intent of breaking the embargo is to allow rockets to be transported to Gaza from Hamas’s suppliers in Syria and Iran. Israel has already intercepted several such ships laden with munitions.”
Kristof, however, writes in favor of the kind of pressure Oren is warning against; pressure that would enable Hamas to carry out its deadly aim, advised by liberal journalists like Kristof in the name of peace and security. Thus he tells Israel what it must do—freeze all settlements, do everything else Kristof thinks necessary to “make a deal more likely.” That Israel has made known time and time again its desire for a real deal is ignored; just as Kristof ignores the continual repetition by Hamas leaders that it never will accept Israel’s legitimacy, no matter what.
And yes, as proof that Israel is losing what Kristof calls its “support base” he points to the NYRB article by Peter Beinart, along with his repetition of the claim that General David Petraeus has disavowed many times, that the US favoring of Israel is breeding anti-Americanism and helping Al Qaeda. So like Kinzer, Kristof knows the solution: Israel alone must act by quickly ending the blockade of Gaza. It has accomplished nothing, he says, except to make Gaza suffer.
Fortunately, for once, the editors of the Times offered its readers not only Oren’s article, but a powerful op-ed by Israeli writer Rabbi Daniel Gordis, who points out, contradicting Kristof, that “there is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza; if anyone goes without food, shelter or medicine, that is by the choice of the Hamas government, which puts garnering international sympathy above taking care of its citizens. Israel has readily agreed to send into Gaza all the food and humanitarian supplies on the boats after they had been inspected for weapons.”
Gordis also points out that the blockade is both necessary and essential, because “Israel has as its foremost obligation the protection of its citizens. Given that, why should it have allowed the flotilla to enter without inspecting its goods? If the United States were to impose a blockade on Iran (which seems unlikely), and another country dispatched a string of ships in a similar operation, is there any chance the United States Navy would let them through without inspection? Israel will, of course, endure tremendous international condemnation for this week’s events. Sadly, though, we Israelis are becoming somewhat inured to such criticism. And we know that we dare not capitulate now.”
To the Israelis, the so-called constructive criticism coming from liberals like Kristof appear as myopic; the kind of advice they instinctively know has to be ignored and challenged. As for Iran- both Kinzer and Kristof should take note of what Gordis points out:
Iran finances Hezbollah and Hamas and does everything it can to weaken and marginalize Israel, inching toward its vision of a world without a Jewish state. The West has known of Iran’s nuclear intentions for well over a decade, but has effectively done nothing. Israelis understand that we — and we alone — will have to ensure our security and our survival.
Israel alone wants peace, but as Gordis points out, it has not been able to “find anyone to make a deal with us.” Hence the kind of advice both Kristof and Kinzer give, if taken, would help only a terrorist state like Iran, and move the region even further away from real peace and security. Israel, he points out, has a good reaso to ignore such supposed well-meaning but dangerous advice; its geographic vulnerability does not allow it to “have the luxury of caving in to the world’s condemnation.”
Writing from the safety of the United States, both Kinzer and Kristof are in no position to give Israel any advice. The world is fortunate that when Israelis read these columns, the only result will be the sound of their incredulous laughter.

If you agree with his solutions, how can you agree with the same solutions that also “forget that Hamas is committed ……. but to the destruction of Israel”?
I think you are trying to belittle and marginalize Mr. Kristof’s well reasoned article by feigning some sort of agreement with it while simultaneously denigrating it.
Why don’t you write about specific examples of things you find to be untrue in this article. Its embarrassing to have spell this out for such an “important” rabbi but I want to make sure you understand simple concepts of reasoning. If Kristof asserts fact “x” for arguement “y” why don’t you explain how fact “x” cannot justify arguement “y”. Your discussion of the facts so far simply includes saying that equating past PLO terror to the killing of innocent civilians on this ship is “ugly and erroneous”. Why is it wrong to compare the two? Killing innocent civilians is killing innocent civilians and does little to help Israel’s international standing much like it did for PLO. That is a completely valid point.

Kristof starts off his article: “I thought: Israel wouldn’t be so obtuse as to use lethal force on self-describedhadn’t described themselves as peace activists, then what? Then the raid would’ve been fine? The Israelis were smart enough to film the raid. If they could be called obtuse, it would be because they didn’t think that so many news outlets would minimize the video evidence.
Kristof also writes about the blockade of Gaza. His ignorance, or at least his tendency to tell just one half of the story, abounds. Does he not know the following facts?
http://www.cicweb.ca/scene/2010/06/israel_aid_to_gaza/

Despite the fact that Israel publicly offered to inspect and then transfer the flotilla’s aid to Gaza several days prior to the incident, many opponents of Israel are now making wild accusations that humanitarian supplies are being blocked from entering Gaza.
The facts put these charges to rest – just take a look at how much aid Israel regularly delivers to Gaza, and what it means in real terms for Gazans:
• Over one million tons of humanitarian supplies were delivered by Israel to the people of Gaza in the past 18 months – that’s equal to nearly one ton of aid for every man, woman and child in Gaza.
In the first quarter of 2010 alone (January-March), Israel delivered 94,500 tons of supplies to Gaza. It’s very easy to miss what that actually means for the people of Gaza. The breakdown includes:
• 40,000 tons of wheat – which is equal to 53 million loaves of bread;
• 2,760 tons of rice – which equals 69 million servings;
• 1,987 tons of clothes and footwear – the equivalent weight of 3.6 million pairs of jeans; and
• 553 tons of milk powder and baby food – equivalent to over 3.1 million days of formula for an average six-month-old baby.
This reflects a long-term effort on the part of Israel to deliver a massive and comprehensive supply of aid to Gaza’s civilians, while restricting the ability of Hamas to import missiles that have been launched at the cities of southern Israel. In 2009 alone:
• During the Muslim holy days of Ramadan and Eid al-Adha, Israel shipped some 11,000 head of cattle into Gaza – enough to provide 8.8 million meals of beef;
• More than 3,000 tons of hypochlorite were delivered by Israel to Gaza for water purification purposes – that’s 60 billion gallons of purified water; and
• Israel brought some 4,883 tons of medical equipment and medicine into Gaza – a weight equivalent to over 360,000 260-piece mobile trauma first aid kits.
Read the full statistics and judge for yourself. Humanitarian crisis in Gaza? Not according to the facts.

sorry for the accidental bolding.

Mark2: now that the shkutzadik “Kingdom of Priests” blog is defunct – meaning that you can no longer service its author – it seems you have turned your coat and now decided to afflict the readers
of THIS fine blog with your petulant, wholly derivative, musings-
in this instance, courtesy of ZOA and Z Street propaganda organs.

How quickly we forget.
Remember when the Soviet Union sent a ‘flotilla’ to Cuba, and Kennedy said, “No way!”?
What’s wrong with this picture?

The so-called relief armada and Kristof’s comments on particular issues arising therefrom skew the focus of serious inquiry away from where it should be: why have we Jewish people, in this and other recent situations, taken initiatives that produce outcomes more comparable to unfunny Marx Brothers movies than reflective of the acknowledged collective wisdom of a people who have been dealing with threat and danger for thousands of years? There is a fantasy abroad in the land of Israel that is new in the annals of our people: that because we now have a sovereign state we no longer need to take into account the “public relations aspect” of anything done by the state of Israel, particularly in light of how many vicious enemies we have, and the number of “independents” who will choose sides based on a “per incident basis.”
There appears to be a blindness of some degree, particularly among citizens of Israel, to the for us eternal necessity of taking into account all points of (enemy) view. We have never been able to afford such ignorance, are not able to now, and will never in the future be able to. It appears that Jews outside of Israel find it easier to see this problem than their brothers and sisters in Israel itself.

Dear Rabbi Hirschfield,
I believe you got it about right re Mr. Kristof.
However, Israel’s head is in the proverbial noose and to a certain degree their choice of methods makes it likely that they will continue to be on the short end of the international media game that tars and feathers them consistently. I consider Mr. Kristoff as pleading for something better even as he throws in the kitchen sink and various anchors that deplete his point. One step toward the answer is for the international community beginning with the United States to stand up and take responsibility to stand between the warring parties, (Israel and Hamas, with boots on the ground and an articulated process that cotrols the flow of goods to the people of Gaza while interdicting the flow of arms. Up till now the international community has been more than happy to let Israel and Egypt be responsible for the blockade and to pay the United Nations to deliver food and medicine to nearly a million impoverished refugees in Gaza. But the cost is clearly going up and the price of inaction may finally outweight the value of letting the world see Israel as a monster.

The commando raid was a botched operation. You don’t rappell soldiers into the waiting arms of a mob. That said, Israel has every right to blockade Gaza–but it should be more intelligent about what it does and does not let in.
Israel might wish to organize a flotilla of its own to help the Kurds in Turkey, or the Asian workers in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia.
Turkey, with the blood of 1.5 million Armenians on its hands, is the last nation on earth to lecture any other nation on human rights.

Mr Kristof’s article should have been entitled, “Saving Israel From Netanyahu”. As a Jew, I understand that there is a difference between being anti-Netanyahu and being anti-Israel (or anti-Jewish). This is not the first time Netanyahu has been Prime Minister. Nor is it the first time, he had held office with his usual chest-thumping bravado that he (and by extension) Israel can do no wrong and can find no partners. Believe me, Rabbi, I am no self-hating Jew (to use Netanyahu’s phrase). But how many blunders can one government stand? Since he took office, Netanyahu’s government, there have been a series of actions which have alientated Israel from its partners. The Netanyahu’s government publicly humiliated the Turkish ambassador to Israel They chose the eve of the indirect talks to assassinate a known terrorist In Dubai. The Mossad assassins used fake British passports. The Netanyahu government chose to throw the issue of Jerusalem and new constrciton literally in V.P. Biden’s face. They have now alienated Turkey for a 2nd time. In addition, they have put their tacit blockade partner, Egypt, in an awkward spot.
When is enough, enough?

jewish people have never been able to pass the tests god has giving them from adam and eve to cain and able to being freed from egypt only to indulge thierselves in the ways of the world.. and killing thier messiah who they were waiting for who was jesus….and so on and so on….that is why god has punished the jews throughout history… that is why the holocaust happened.. that is why they cant live in peace… there is a cult called the raelians who claim the space people shown the raelians how to clone humans..the raelians say the space people told them man was created by these space people and the leader of they space people is yaway.. the raelians also say the space people told them to build a landing pad in israel…. well the space people are actually the fallen angels and thier leader is lucifer.. god is going to allow lucifer land in israel.. and punish the jews once again cause the jews have lived a life of evil….

Very well put, Mr. Jaffe.
There is no legitimate reason for Israelis to make the effort to paint them in an unfavorable light an easier than the predisposition of detractors already makes possible.

Petulant, Mr. Tobin?
It takes one to know one.

In a world in which North Korea sinks a South Korean naval vessel killing dozens, Iran arms Islamic terrorists, who kill hundreds, Russia bombs Chechnya, killing thousands, and the United States and Great Britain, while targeting al Qaida and Taliban, kill an indeterminate number of civilians, only Israel is subjected to international “investigations” such as that conducted by Richard Goldstone and that being called for by the Security Council in the wake of the recent flotilla fiasco.
Why only Israel? Why is the United Nations silent about other situations that cry out for international investigations? Surely it’s not because what Israel did was worse than what other member nations have done. Certainly it’s not because Israel lacks self-criticism or mechanisms for internal investigation. Plainly it’s not because the other “offenders” were provoked, while Israel was unprovoked.
There is only one answer – because Israel has long been singled out for public scrutiny and opprobrium by the United Nations in particular and the international community in general.
This is not to say that Israel has always been blameless. It foolishly took the bait and allowed itself to be provoked into overreacting to a well planned provocation by so-called “humanitarians,” who love only those who hate the Jewish state. The best proof that the flotilla had little to do with providing humanitarian aid to the people of Gaza and everything to do with breaking Israel’s entirely lawful military blockade of a terrorist enclave, is Hamas’ refusal to accept the food and medicine that Israel removed from the captured boats. The leaders of the flotilla admitted that their object was the same as Hamas’ – not to provide humanitarian assistance to Gaza but rather to break the military blockade that is designed to keep rockets and other anti-personnel weapons from the hands of Hamas terrorists.
Israel should have been smarter in its efforts to enforce its blockade, but it did nothing illegal – and what it did do certainly doesn’t warrant being singled out for the stigma of an international investigation.
If the United Nations is to get into the business of ordering and conducting international investigations, it must establish neutral and objective criteria for when such an investigation is warranted. These criteria must be equally applicable to all nations, and not merely to the Jewish nation.
Primary among the criteria must be “the worst first.” Under that rule, investigations must be conducted in the order of the seriousness of the offense, not the unpopularity of the offender. Israel’s actions in enforcing its blockade ranks fairly low on the pecking order of offenses, compared to those that have never been subjected to a mandated international investigation. Until and unless North Korea, Iran, Russia and other nations are required to undergo international scrutiny, the demand that Israel do so is illegitimate.
The second neutral criteria should be the capacity of the accused nation to investigate itself and to be subjected to domestic scrutiny and criticism. Here too Israel fares must better than most. It has an activist Supreme Court, a free and aggressive press and a responsive political system. It doesn’t need dictatorial tyrannies telling it how to defend its citizens.
For international law to have any credibility, it must be applied neutrally, objectively and fairly to all nations. Singling out Israel for special scrutiny and investigation, while far more serious offenders and offenses are ignored, is incompatible with the rule of law.

Dear Sir:
As I recall, didn’t they use to hang a pirates from the yard-arms even though they were acting under Letters of Mark.
Sincerely, J R Dittbrenner